@projectmoon said:
@oldbutndy some are valid. Some are technically correct, but don't matter. Others are matters of opinion. But to me it mostly reads like complaining. Iterating a lot of problems (real or supposed), and using a sycophantic AI to write long winded arguments.
Instead of AI generated complaints, maybe take action?
Maybe I misunderstood when I read some @grenudi comments. I thought AI was used to try to summarize a large number of hours of research into something more concise.
My own use of AI, in asking google to estimate how long to write a kernel driver for a sub section of hardware (after reverse engineering it), was to get a sense of just how much effort that is. (No idea here, since I am hardware guy with some embedded controller coding, and data sheets were always available). So, when I multiplied all the various manufacturer sub sections by all the hours required (AI est.) to reverse engineer and code kernel drivers, the effort required seemed to be hundreds or thousands of times as large as the current method using halium layer.
Summary: only way it (native component drivers in the kernel for a whole device) will ever happen is if OEM's WRITE those drivers.
Translation (for past devices) = NEVER.
Future: Maybe (brax 3 ? or others ?).
So, from what I understand of all this so far, is UT developers are making this work the ONLY way practically possible. Best way architecturally ? does not matter. No other way.
Future: when multiple millions are using UT ...
